US Juniors needs MORE Nat'l and advanced experiences not less

The US/USTA needs to apply the age old time tested good karma principle
that a player plays with levels above them and below
ala Roddick mentoring Harrison nurture develop and give back

ala the hired (former)college hitter at the academy for the best juniors
who play with the next best juniors

While the stated intentions/goals of the USTA Jr Committee have merit
to
1) grow tennis (mission statement)
2) not miss school
3) more family time
4) reduce costs
5) increase local play
6) more local/regional qualifying for nat'l play
7) have best players playing best players
8) identitfy best players and help develop best players

the Best path for US tennis and their stated goals is
more national play not less
more players playing nationals not less
more futures and challengers
more ITF's across country
more inter college/ junior tournament events
more team tennis

Reducing incentives like # of tournaments from 8 to 6
and changing point structure has already deemphasized
needs to chase points

However, Limiting draw sizes from 64 to 32 in Nat Opens ridiculously excludes
50% of participation and gross revenues for the benifit of final 4 main's and back's one day hotel cost and missing school (if not home schooled)
NO active Parents,players,coaches directors have supported this (save a up to a theoretical min 2-5% that I havent met)

Further Reducing Natl Opens to 2x' a year once in Feb which has been even finished in recent years due to rain and during Thanksgiving (FAMILY TIME?)
not that anyone REALLY minds. But eliminating July Nat opens when no school? and reducing 3 site field to 96 total?

Easter Bowl to 32? from 128? x 8 divisions...75% denied former nat'l opportunity and this was compromise for some of USTA that wanted the Easter Bowl Gone!!!

Winter Nationals to a 32 training team workshop? Great, now include all 128 per division and include 12's whose players and families would really love it as they do zonals

Then reducing and restricting Regionals to own regions? Playing Same Kids again.

Qualifying progressively is a system but why limit to that.

Before 2011 WE have experienced freedom of choice, freedom of opportunities to play more Nat'l family events, travel fun, missing school where kids make up assignments and or do online and still pull 4.0's, get a
2nd CHANCE at playing someone from NY or FL or Mich or in an older division
and train a few days extra on the road for the Copper Bowl.
These are valued, beneficial, and treasured experiences minimized and or denied.

In their quest to development of pros The 2014 USTA changes appear to confuse and favor the goals of the development program at the expense and denial
of freedom of participation of the multitudes where the next champions may very well come from, the late bloomers, injured, the multi sporters etc..

Instead of denying participation
how about ADDING and GROWING participation
for Better players
MORE FUTURES and Challengers
and top junior events with
future competitors
Create incentives for futures players to train and compete with top juniors

Perhaps a bridge between those impossible first ATP points

As the USTA has proposed and passed and implemented certain changes
its current system has not provided adequate input nor beneficial structure
representative and in the interests of WE the parents, Jr community players, coaches, directors, and industry.
With modern technology, input and representative consensus and mandate can be better achieved with surveys, open meetings.blogs,etc..
But this is another discussion that will help achieve the free flow of ideas
towards a truly mandated, beneficial, and representative system and structure that we in US JR tennis may participate, thrive, and flourish.

I don't know why 99% of regular junior tennis supporters need to be so concerned about what is facing the top 1%.

Seriously, if you are good enough to be ranked in top 50 to 100, you have plenty of opportunities to play people better/worse than you. I am not going to lose sleep over the fact that these miniscule percentage of players are somehow being wronged.

USTA needs to worry more about the 100,000 junior players of varying skills and get them more interested in tennis. What happens with top 36 or 64 players will have no effect on that.

I don't know why 99% of regular junior tennis supporters need to be so concerned about what is facing the top 1%.

Seriously, if you are good enough to be ranked in top 50 to 100, you have plenty of opportunities to play people better/worse than you. I am not going to lose sleep over the fact that these miniscule percentage of players are somehow being wronged.

USTA needs to worry more about the 100,000 junior players of varying skills and get them more interested in tennis. What happens with top 36 or 64 players will have no effect on that.

Click to expand...

I thought Ten and under tennis is suppose to address juniors of varying skills and levels and get them more interested in tennis? They have green ball up to age 12.

I am new to this forum
really...
frustrated with the state and direction of US tennis
and willing to express
my ideas in spite of unproductive stifling attitudes
as yours expressed

Click to expand...

Aloha

I think what they were trying to say that this topic has been discussed ad-infinitum here, that's all.

You will find plenty of support for your position, but you will also be attacked mercilessly as a whining, rich tennis parent with a kid who sucks at tennis who just wants to point chase all over the country..

I think what they were trying to say that this topic has been discussed ad-infinitum here, that's all.

You will find plenty of support for your position, but you will also be attacked mercilessly as a whining, rich tennis parent with a kid who sucks at tennis who just wants to point chase all over the country..

have fun storming the castle...

Click to expand...

These are my suggestions observations cause I care, am knowledgable and am John Q Public served. I am not rich. l work with and see kids all over the country that want to play natls and cant. I work with kids and have my own kids that did and do Natls now. While the topic may have been discussed here it is still very much alive and present needing more light the better.Shared over 200 views in 7 hours, time to share well worth it.
No storming here just asking for modern communication.
Freedom of speech and choice ,Buddy

These are my suggestions observations cause I care, am knowledgable and am John Q Public served. I am not rich. l work with and see kids all over the country that want to play natls and cant. I work with kids and have my own kids that did and do Natls now. While the topic may have been discussed here it is still very much alive and present needing more light the better.Shared over 200 views in 7 hours, time to share well worth it.
No storming here just asking for modern communication.
Freedom of speech and choice ,Buddy

Click to expand...

Relax, buddy.

If you take the time to read what has already been posted, you will find I am on your side, probably no stronger advocate for you position, buddy.

I wasnt making accustations, I was just trying to I give you a friendly heads up, but nevermind, buddy.

I don't know why 99% of regular junior tennis supporters need to be so concerned about what is facing the top 1%.

Seriously, if you are good enough to be ranked in top 50 to 100, you have plenty of opportunities to play people better/worse than you. I am not going to lose sleep over the fact that these miniscule percentage of players are somehow being wronged.

USTA needs to worry more about the 100,000 junior players of varying skills and get them more interested in tennis. What happens with top 36 or 64 players will have no effect on that.

Click to expand...

You missed my point, Im saying the top %1 should be playing with players below as well, in 64 draws in Nat opens and 128-196 in 4 Nat championships giving those top 200-300-400 chance to compete and get better
and in turn be challenged with higher levels
There are very few futures, ITFs, challengers in west US

and TOP players DO affect and INSPIRE all levels of players
Michael Chang, Arthur Ashe, Agassi, Federer, Roddick's serve, the Williams sisters, all inspired new players and products
we all watched Oudin a few years back, or root for Big John,... who's the next young buck?
We are all in it together

Thank you tennis5 for the background on this forum
I dont party much and didnt participate on your forum but did observe
and I did give input to USTA prior to 2011 changes vehemently in summer 2010
but of course just heard the inadequate rationales that have failed to be fulfilled. Thanks for all your right on analogies re train(s).
What is DONE is that the USTA passed something Bad in March 2014 Yes
However there is a clear mandate from the players,parents, coaches, TD's, and industry and now with a little media exposure that these changes are not supported by membership and affiliates served.
What is also DONE is 2011 and much of 2012 living with the changes and their adverse affects on participation,tournament directors, and economies.
The systemic boiling point IS reached with these 2014 changes.
We all get burnt out and dont want to be bothered in futility.
But like this great game of tennis, as we teach our kids it might be 2-5 in the 3rd of this match,
but there's another match tomorrow and the day after that.
It aint OVER. It is not 2013 yet. There will be more meetings.
The train will come around again and our bags need be packed.
MORE Media exposure and high profile support, tennis stars, celebrities
need be involved. All that is asked is a fair and accountable participation
in process of determining structure of participants served.

You missed my point, Im saying the top %1 should be playing with players below as well, in 64 draws in Nat opens and 128-196 in 4 Nat championships giving those top 200-300-400 chance to compete and get better
and in turn be challenged with higher levels
There are very few futures, ITFs, challengers in west US

and TOP players DO affect and INSPIRE all levels of players
Michael Chang, Arthur Ashe, Agassi, Federer, Roddick's serve, the Williams sisters, all inspired new players and products
we all watched Oudin a few years back, or root for Big John,... who's the next young buck?
We are all in it together

Click to expand...

No, I got your point just fine. Top 200-300-400 are still TINY fractions of kids playing in high schools and parks all around the country. USTA should be focused on getting more kids to play, not catering to every whims of those top players. Most of those kids already have full compliments of support and resources, 99% of the junior kids do not.

The record of USTA producing top players over last couple of decades (at least in men's side) have been abysmal. What you are suggesting is just going back to the same system that has produced jack squat.

I agree top players do inspire others. And I think the record shows that catering to those top 200-300-400 players does not produce inspiring results. What will produce better result is to get more and more juniors to participate because it will increase the chance that someone out of that increased pool will become great.

USTA needs to focus on growing the game more broadly. If cutting back on top 200-300-400 players will allow them to shift the resources to top 200,000-300,000-400,000 players, that is a wise choice to make.

No, I got your point just fine. Top 200-300-400 are still TINY fractions of kids playing in high schools and parks all around the country. USTA should be focused on getting more kids to play, not catering to every whims of those top players. Most of those kids already have full compliments of support and resources, 99% of the junior kids do not.

Click to expand...

They are focused on getting more kids to play. That is the what TUAT program is about. It is working, at least as far as achieving that objective. More kids are starting tennis younger.

The changes to the competition schedule have nothing to do with that, except Pmac thinks that by reducing the amount of national competition the sport will look more attractive to parents deciding what sports there kid should focus on at the age of 8,9,10, etc(his own words). You are mixing apples and oranges.

Keep in mind the changes were not just to national tournaments, they eliminated half of the sectional events that had national ranking point too. The changes to the national competition schedule are about focusing more on top players and eliminating the riff-raff.

The record of USTA producing top players over last couple of decades (at least in men's side) have been abysmal. What you are suggesting is just going back to the same system that has produced jack squat.

Click to expand...

Top players are not produced by federations. They are produced by coaches, parents, and systems that allow them to thrive.

USTA needs to focus on growing the game more broadly. If cutting back on top 200-300-400 players will allow them to shift the resources to top 200,000-300,000-400,000 players, that is a wise choice to make.

Click to expand...

Except that is not the choice they are making. They are not shifting any resources from the top 200-300-400 to the 200,000-300,000-400,00. They are shifting resources from the top 200-300-400 to focus in the top 1-50-100.

They say they know who the potential pros are by 13 or 14 via there Talent ID network, so they want to focus all the national tournaments on them, make them better. That's why most of the 'new' events are exclusive 'master' events for the top 16, 32, etc. What was eliminated were the bottom half of the draws for the other tournaments, the kids over 100.

Look, what they are saying is if you are not a top 100 player, they don't care about you. You could be 200, 2000, or 200,000, doesn't matter. Don't play national competitions, you are a nuisance, and wasting the time and money of the really good kids.

Look, what they are saying is if you are not a top 100 player, they don't care about you. You could be 200, 2000, or 200,000, doesn't matter. Don't play national competitions, you are a nuisance, and wasting the time and money of the really good kids.

Click to expand...

Exactly Aloha. I said this a year ago. It appears the new model is TAUT to create lots of tennis fans to buy equipment, play in leagues, attend the Open.

And support the handful they think can make it, a few American champs to feed the fan base they created.

The problem with the plan is that no one can hand pick a group from which the next champion will come. But they think they can.

No, I got your point just fine. Top 200-300-400 are still TINY fractions of kids playing in high schools and parks all around the country. USTA should be focused on getting more kids to play, not catering to every whims of those top players. Most of those kids already have full compliments of support and resources, 99% of the junior kids do not.

The record of USTA producing top players over last couple of decades (at least in men's side) have been abysmal. What you are suggesting is just going back to the same system that has produced jack squat.

I agree top players do inspire others. And I think the record shows that catering to those top 200-300-400 players does not produce inspiring results. What will produce better result is to get more and more juniors to participate because it will increase the chance that someone out of that increased pool will become great.

USTA needs to focus on growing the game more broadly. If cutting back on top 200-300-400 players will allow them to shift the resources to top 200,000-300,000-400,000 players, that is a wise choice to make.

Click to expand...

I agree the USTA should grow the game broadly.... at all levels. and much of the time it has been attempting to.
However there needs to be a free and open pipeline of opportunities for all.
Eliminating nat'l opportunities for the aspiring #200-800 doesn't add 100,000-400,000 players it actually discourages them if they are looking for upward competitive opportunities. You have brought up a very valid and important point of getting more players involved. I am all for that and have spent much of my tennis energy participating in that in NJTL's for years and team tennis etc The USTA has long recognized that this a game and kids want to play and compete. The 70's Natl Jr Tennis Leagues were
give 'em a racquet, teach them to play, play games matches immediately
technique as you go, within match play.10 and under tennis....
Like the 50 kids at a summer NJTL clinic that only play each summer, need an intermediate competitive level forum prior to HS to progress
The top 1000 need a free flow of opportunities earned to the top
They are the closest to the future pros. No matter the resources
No,stifiled,limited, and delayed nat'l opportunities = discouragement.
Growing the grassroots is a parallel level of focus to natl play opportunities
Its about bridges, progressions, and a free flow multi-pipelines of opportunities.

They are focused on getting more kids to play. That is the what TUAT program is about. It is working, at least as far as achieving that objective. More kids are starting tennis younger.

The changes to the competition schedule have nothing to do with that, except Pmac thinks that by reducing the amount of national competition the sport will look more attractive to parents deciding what sports there kid should focus on at the age of 8,9,10, etc(his own words). You are mixing apples and oranges.

Keep in mind the changes were not just to national tournaments, they eliminated half of the sectional events that had national ranking point too. The changes to the national competition schedule are about focusing more on top players and eliminating the riff-raff.

Top players are not produced by federations. They are produced by coaches, parents, and systems that allow them to thrive.

Except that is not the choice they are making. They are not shifting any resources from the top 200-300-400 to the 200,000-300,000-400,00. They are shifting resources from the top 200-300-400 to focus in the top 1-50-100.

They say they know who the potential pros are by 13 or 14 via there Talent ID network, so they want to focus all the national tournaments on them, make them better. That's why most of the 'new' events are exclusive 'master' events for the top 16, 32, etc. What was eliminated were the bottom half of the draws for the other tournaments, the kids over 100.

Look, what they are saying is if you are not a top 100 player, they don't care about you. You could be 200, 2000, or 200,000, doesn't matter. Don't play national competitions, you are a nuisance, and wasting the time and money of the really good kids.

The changes to the competition schedule have nothing to do with that, except Pmac thinks that by reducing the amount of national competition the sport will look more attractive to parents deciding what sports there kid should focus on at the age of 8,9,10, etc(his own words). You are mixing apples and oranges.

Click to expand...

It is not mixing apples and oranges. If playing at a higher level is more focused on local competition and not about endless travels, it is far more attractive to parents with modest income which equals more kids.

Keep in mind the changes were not just to national tournaments, they eliminated half of the sectional events that had national ranking point too. The changes to the national competition schedule are about focusing more on top players and eliminating the riff-raff.

Click to expand...

USTA shouldn't care of middling top players who have no chance of going pro. There are only handful of kids who have realistic chances of that. I would support making the pool of USTA backed-players at the very top even smaller.

Except that is not the choice they are making. They are not shifting any resources from the top 200-300-400 to the 200,000-300,000-400,00. They are shifting resources from the top 200-300-400 to focus in the top 1-50-100.

Click to expand...

Then they are doing the right thing. The chances of top 200, 300, 400 player becoming the next Agassi is virtually nil. USTA should only focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent. USTA should also focus on getting thousands of more kids involved so that you can develop more exceptional talent just by brute numbers.

Anything in between is not something USTA should care more about. Who cares if there are 50 more NCAA players from US? Do you seriously think that is going to inspire some kid to take up tennis?

USTA should only focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent.

Click to expand...

They have done that since 1998, this current high performance program is the 4th regime since the idea began. You know how many male players you have heard of have resulted in the 15 years they have been trying? Zero.

I agree with your point they should grow the game and focus on sheer numbers of kids playing tennis so that the odds increase of the next champion.

But they should let an existing academy or private coach develop that talent and simply provide the money. An actual USTA run program with actual USTA coaches and facilities has failed for 15 years and will likely keep failing. Pat Mac can not name one boy in his program destined for stardom. So we move the clock to 16 years, 17 years....so maybe they hit on one guy in 20-25 years of trying? Total waste of money.

It is not mixing apples and oranges. If playing at a higher level is more focused on local competition and not about endless travels, it is far more attractive to parents with modest income which equals more kids.

Click to expand...

That is certainly pMacs theory. I think it is hogwash. Particularly if the goal is to attract more elite athletes, not just more kids.

USTA shouldn't care of middling top players who have no chance of going pro. There are only handful of kids who have realistic chances of that. I would support making the pool of USTA backed-players at the very top even smaller.

Click to expand...

And here we have the crux of the matter and the heart of the disagreement. You and the people on your side of the argument think the national junior tournaments system is some minor league for the professionals, and that if you are not on a path to be a professional, you should not be a part of it. You believe its mission or purpose is to develop professional tennis players.

I, and the the people on my side of the argument, recognize that now matter how small or large you make it, 99% of the kids playing national junior tennis are not going to be pro's. National junior competition is about so much more than that. A by-product of it will be some really great players who, with the help of the USTA, or despite the USTA, might make it as pros. But that's s not the purpose of the junior competition system.

Then they are doing the right thing. The chances of top 200, 300, 400 player becoming the next Agassi is virtually nil. USTA should only focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent.

Click to expand...

Same thing as above. If they want to do their PD thing and try to build the next Agassi, then fine, I don't care, let them. Have their tea parties, theie master events, sweet sixteen parties. Whatever. But don't take the events away from the rest of the kids. And don't pretend that by taking away events from these kids you are "reallocating resources" to the even lower ranked kids, sorry, that's not whats happening.

And here we have the crux of the matter and the heart of the disagreement. You and the people on your side of the argument think the national junior tournaments system is some minor league for the professionals, and that if you are not on a path to be a professional, you should not be a part of it. You believe its mission or purpose is to develop professional tennis players.

I, and the the people on my side of the argument, recognize that now matter how small or large you make it, 99% of the kids playing national junior tennis are not going to be pro's. National junior competition is about so much more than that. A by-product of it will be some really great players who, with the help of the USTA, or despite the USTA, might make it as pros. But that's s not the purpose of the junior competition system.

Click to expand...

Nope, that is not my position at all.

My position is that these tournaments ARE NOT some minor league for the professionals. And since they ARE NOT for producing professionals, it is irresponsible to force parents and children to travel around the country in mis-guided attempt to collect points. Local tournaments are more than capable of producing capable amateur athletes. National tournaments are not necessary except for the very best.

Reducing the number of national-level tournaments brings the system back to where it should be - at the local district/state level where almost every other sport is supported.

This is a positive step for everyone involved. The only people who are upset are those people who think their kid is that special 1 in a million athlete who can go pro if they just get more exposure. That is just a pipe dream and earlier it is snuffed, better it is for the kid.

My position is that these tournaments ARE NOT some minor league for the professionals. And since they ARE NOT for producing professionals, it is irresponsible to force parents and children to travel around the country in mis-guided attempt to collect points. Local tournaments are more than capable of producing capable amateur athletes. National tournaments are not necessary except for the very best.

Click to expand...

Exactly who is forcing all these kids to go to these tournaments ? Name names. Seriously, who is putting a gun to their head and saying "you must go to all of these tournaments" ? People want to go to them, not just for the points, for the experience. Nobody ever has to go to a tennis tournament. Let me guess, they just don't know how stupid they are you are just trying to save them from themselves ?

Reducing the number of national-level tournaments brings the system back to where it should be - at the local district/state level where almost every other sport is supported.

Click to expand...

First of all, Tennis is not every other sport. Second, the changes don't accomplish this, they force kids to go to regional tournaments in one of four regions that are most likely father away from where they live than the current regional tournaments. So not only are the changes flawed conceptually, they are even more flawed in the implementation, they don't even implement the objectives they claim to have.

The only people who are upset are those people who think their kid is that special 1 in a million athlete who can go pro if they just get more exposure. That is just a pipe dream and earlier it is snuffed, better it is for the kid.

Click to expand...

And there you go 10S4US, we wound up exactly where I said we would would, only took 24 posts.

I don't expect you would. 50 kids who worked their tails off for years. It's not like their the next Agassi, screw'em, I mean that the only thing to really care about, right ? Really, there is No 1, and just a bunch of losers after that.

Exactly who is forcing all these kids to go to these tournaments ? Name names. Seriously, who is putting a gun to their head and saying "you must go to all of these tournaments" ? People want to go to them, not just for the points, for the experience. Nobody ever has to go to a tennis tournament. Let me guess, they just don't know how stupid they are you are just trying to save them from themselves ?

Click to expand...

You can't dangle carrots out in front and say "who? me? The horse doesn't have to go after the carrot!"

If they want the experience, anyone can start a national tournament and invite those people for "experience". This is a free country. Why do you need USTA sanction if all you want is "experience"?

First of all, Tennis is not every other sport. Second, the changes don't accomplish this, they force kids to go to regional tournaments in one of four regions that are most likely father away from where they live than the current regional tournaments. So not only are the changes flawed conceptually, they are even more flawed in the implementation, they don't even implement the objectives they claim to have.

Click to expand...

It affects significantly less number of kids and vast majority of those kids have USTA support. That's the whole point.

USTA should only focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent.

Click to expand...

The USTA's focus is on growing the sport of tennis. From junior to seniors to wheelchair players. The USTA Player Development division exists to focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent, but as TCF has said, they have been doing this, quite miserably, for quite some time. But rather than accept they are the problem rather then the solution, they have hijacked the junior tournament system.

My goal is to get her started in tournaments when she turns 12, and my long term goal is to get her to be a high school all-county level player.... I am not expecting her to play in college whatsoever. It would take too much away from academics to chase that. ROI is just not there.

She is enrolled in a gifted children program in her school district and is one of the best math student in the district. The kids in the program have almost 100% college entrance rate and many of them have been accepted to Ivy League and other comparable schools like Stanford and Berkeley.

So expecting her to graduate college is not much of an expectation either.

Tennis is just to keep her in shape and be involved athletically, but I want to make sure she has a really sound foundation.

Well, we have parents of 8 year olds, 10 year olds, and 12 years old on this board.
They have spent a bit more time and money on training their kids, than just the one clinic that your daughter is doing...
So, naturally, they are upset that when 2014 turns around and there are drastic cuts in the 12's.
Their kids will never go to the Winter Nationals, Copper Bowl, Easter Bowl.
The clays and Hards will be cut to 64 kids for the 12's....

But, back to you as these are your posts I am quoting..... How would you feel if 75% of the high school teams were cut?
That's right, the number is correct, as that is the ultimate cut in USTA national tournaments.
Would you feel pleased that your daughter who attended her one clinic a week, and now 3 out of 4 high school teams were gone.. (Go back to pre 2010 Nationals and see what is cut.......)

You also state:

Once a talent is identified, USTA needs to provide the resources to take them to the very high level.
It does not mean parents cannot be involved....
USTA should only focus on small number of kids with exceptional talent.

Well, we already have that. It is called PD. PLAYER DEVELOPMENT RUN BY A GUY NAMED PMAC, HIS BROTHER IS FAMOUS.
Couple of million are spent on that already.....
Are you suggesting more? Track record is so stellar.

USTA should also focus on getting thousands of more kids involved so that you can develop
more exceptional talent just by brute numbers.

Well, we already have that. It is called TAUT.
LOT OF MONEY SPENT THERE...... IT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED A BIT.

You state:If playing at a higher level is more focused on local competition and not about endless travels,
it is far more attractive to parents with modest income which equals more kids.

First, if your kid is a standout, a Taylor Townsend for example, then she will be at Boca and travel expenses are FREE.
So, if you have a modest income, and your daughter or son is a wow, it is zero cost.

Every section has local tournaments and many different levels.
But, local competition outside of California and Florida is very limited for playing at a high national level.........
I would think you would know this since you are posting about the National changes here,
but will assume you live in California or Florida, and don't realize that the rest of the country has some smaller sections.

Ok, let's talk about endless travels.
Maybe, spend 5 minutes reading about the new regionals and you would realize that geographically they are even worse than they are now.......... And farther away.

Anything in between is not something USTA should care more about.
Who cares if there are 50 more NCAA players from US?

Who cares? Well, I know you don't as you have planned out already what your daughter will be doing.....
And your rational for planning it out...

Trust me, what I am doing is very common among Asian households

Actually, a lot of Asian parents do let their kids pick out their own sports,
glad you can lump a group of people together, some segments of the population actually dislike stereotypes.

But back to what you stated:Anything in between is not something USTA should care more about.
Who cares if there are 50 more NCAA players from US?

Wait, so the USTA should only care about the top 1% and the very bottom,
but not the middle kids who might want to play college tennis?
99% of the tournament kids are trying to get to college tennis.
Cuts in national tournaments reduces exposure.
I understand you are not concerned about that as you state you do not aspire for your daughter to play college tennis,
but some of us do.....

You can't dangle carrots out in front and say "who? me? The horse doesn't have to go after the carrot!"

Click to expand...

So this pretty much clears it up. It looks like you agree with me. You know whats best, all the stupid, crazy tennis parents don't realize what a bad ROI competing in national junior tennis is, they can't control themselves when 'points' are dangled in front them. The USTA is doing this for their own good. I suppose we should bow down and and kiss you hand for looking out for us ?

What's even sadder about this is in your own posts you say you have no interest in having your daughter play outside her section. You think it has a bad ROI. So, to be blunt, why don't you mind you own business ? Or better yet, why don't you go bother the old folks and leave the kids alone. I mean, the last time I checked, the over 65 3.5+ division was having a national team tournament next month. And its sanctioned by the USTA for Christ sake! Guess what, nobody at that tournament has a chance of being the next Andre Agassi either. So why are the leaving their section ??? Why aren't you over at Adult Tennis league board saying we should gut the national adult league tournaments becuase all these silly geriatrics are making a bad investment decisions ? I mean, seriously, they have medical bills coming up, grandchildren they need to take care of, they shouldn't be allowed to fly all over the country for tennis tournaments. We need to save them from themselves. If they win the tournament, they get a trophy and a picture in the USTA magazine(and a ratings bump). How can they resist ?????

Well, we have parents of 8 year olds, 10 year olds, and 12 years old on this board.
They have spent a bit more time and money on training their kids, than just the one clinic that your daughter is doing...
So, naturally, they are upset that when 2014 turns around and there are drastic cuts in the 12's.
Their kids will never go to the Winter Nationals, Copper Bowl, Easter Bowl.
The clays and Hards will be cut to 64 kids for the 12's....

Click to expand...

If they are spending thousands of dollars in hopes of getting their kids into those tournaments when they are really not the cream of the crop, they only have themselves to blame. This should be about getting exposed to a great and healthy hobbie. Not about collecting trophies.

But, back to you as these are your posts I am quoting..... How would you feel if 75% of the high school teams were cut?
That's right, the number is correct, as that is the ultimate cut in USTA national tournaments.
Would you feel pleased that your daughter who attended her one clinic a week, and now 3 out of 4 high school teams were gone.. (Go back to pre 2010 Nationals and see what is cut.......)

Click to expand...

But that is exactly opposite of what is happening. The truer analogy would be that they are eliminating national travel teams so that they can focus more on local high school teams. And yes, I see that as nothing but goodness.

Well, we already have that. It is called PD. PLAYER DEVELOPMENT RUN BY A GUY NAMED PMAC, HIS BROTHER IS FAMOUS.
Couple of million are spent on that already.....
Are you suggesting more? Track record is so stellar.

Every section has local tournaments and many different levels.
But, local competition outside of California and Florida is very limited for playing at a high national level.........
I would think you would know this since you are posting about the National changes here,
but will assume you live in California or Florida, and don't realize that the rest of the country has some smaller sections.

Click to expand...

And the very best kids out of those small section will get to play kids from other sections. Sounds good to me.

Wait, so the USTA should only care about the top 1% and the very bottom,
but not the middle kids who might want to play college tennis?
99% of the tournament kids are trying to get to college tennis.
Cuts in national tournaments reduces exposure.
I understand you are not concerned about that as you state you do not aspire for your daughter to play college tennis,
but some of us do.....

Click to expand...

Yes, they should only care about the top 1%. Because at the end of the day, USTA's mission is to grow the game and maximize participation. Getting more kids early exposed to tennis does that, and making it easier for young kids to play does that. And they have rolled out new programs to achieve that. It also helps to have Americans at the top of the tour, which is why you care about the top 1%.

College tennis has almost no impact and USTA should not care about developing a feeder system. In the age of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Internet, the coaches will find you, if you are talented enough. Look at how many foreign kids you never heard of getting scholarships.

I understand many of you have invested a lot to get to where you (and your kid) are. But you knew going in ROI was low. Play for the love, not for points.

What's even sadder about this is in your own posts you say you have no interest in having your daughter play outside her section. You think it has a bad ROI. So, to be blunt, why don't you mind you own business ? Or better yet, why don't you go bother the old folks and leave the kids alone. I mean, the last time I checked, the over 65 3.5+ division was having a national team tournament next month. And its sanctioned by the USTA for Christ sake! Guess what, nobody at that tournament has a chance of being the next Andre Agassi either. So why are the leaving their section ??? Why aren't you over at Adult Tennis league board saying we should gut the national adult league tournaments becuase all these silly geriatrics are making a bad investment decisions ? I mean, seriously, they ave medical bills coming up, grand children they need to take care of, they shouldn't be allowed to fly all over the country for tennis tournaments. We need to save them from themselves. If they win the tournament, they get a trophy and a picture in the USTA magazine(and a ratings bump). How can they resist ?????

Click to expand...

I have been saying that.

I think having nationals for USTA leagues breed nothing but sandbagging and cause more trouble than what its worth. If I was the head of USTA, that is the first thing I woud do - get rid of nationals.

The same goes for the juniors. Nationals should only be for kids with realistic chances to go pro, opening it up to more just cause problems down the line.

I think having nationals for USTA leagues breed nothing but sandbagging and cause more trouble than what its worth. If I was the head of USTA, that is the first thing I woud do - get rid of nationals.

The same goes for the juniors. Nationals should only be for kids with realistic chances to go pro, opening it up to more just cause problems down the line.

Click to expand...

Seriously ? Holy crap man, I was joking. It was an analogy ad-absurdum. Is there any place you don't stick you self-righteous nose ? I hope you are pulling my leg....

You're an even bigger stick in the mud than I imagined.

You just don't get it. The USTA is non-profit organization that is supposed to be responsive to its members. A democracy, of sorts. If the seniors want to fly around the country, that's their prerogative.

The junior competition should be what the parents of the Juniors want it to be. They are the constituents being served, they should decide, not PD, or some busy body like yourself who just thinks you are so much damn smarter than us.

Exactly who is forcing all these kids to go to these tournaments ? Name names. Seriously, who is putting a gun to their head and saying "you must go to all of these tournaments" ? People want to go to them, not just for the points, for the experience. Nobody ever has to go to a tennis tournament. Let me guess, they just don't know how stupid they are you are just trying to save them from themselves ?

First of all, Tennis is not every other sport. Second, the changes don't accomplish this, they force kids to go to regional tournaments in one of four regions that are most likely father away from where they live than the current regional tournaments. So not only are the changes flawed conceptually, they are even more flawed in the implementation, they don't even implement the objectives they claim to have.

And there you go 10S4US, we wound up exactly where I said we would would, only took 24 posts.

Click to expand...

Gameboy,
you want your kid to play local do it
Similarly others should have nat'l opportunities
There need be a free flow pipeline of progressions
for all to the top
Stifiling the Top 200-1000 WILL limit pro development as well
Where do you think the pros will come from? Not that that should be the only goal or even major focus of Natl Jr compettiton as other have said that should be two seperate goals .
After reading your reasoning its clear you have your own position outside the best interest for the majority but thanks for fueling the Nat'l cause

Gameboy,
you want your kid to play local do it
Similarly others should have nat'l opportunities
There need be a free flow pipeline of progressions
for all to the top
Stifiling the Top 200-1000 WILL limit pro development as well
Where do you think the pros will come from? Not that that should be the only goal or even major focus of Natl Jr compettiton as other have said that should be two seperate goals .
After reading your reasoning its clear you have your own position outside the best interest for the majority but thanks for fueling the Nat'l cause

Click to expand...

Don't bother arguing with gameboy.

The more the changes upset you the happier he is.

See, he knows what's best for you, he's smarter than you. You're just an immature, irresponsible person having a tantrum.

You need to understand that if your child is not ranked in the top 100, wanting to participate in a tournament more than 50+ miles from you home is clearly a non-optimal financial decision. That's not acceptable. It's his job to save you from this. He understands that you may not like him now, but in 15 years when your child is playing 7.5+ mixed doubles and gone to college on all the money he saved you and gotten a safe, secure degree, like an MBA or a DDS, you will look back an be grateful to him.

You just don't get it. The USTA is non-profit organization that is supposed to be responsive to its members. A democracy, of sorts. If the seniors want to fly around the country, that's their prerogative.

The junior competition should be what the parents of the Juniors want it to be. They are the constituents being served, they should decide, not PD, or some busy body like yourself who just thinks you are so much damn smarter than us.

Click to expand...

No, you don't get it. There is NOTHING in the charter of USTA about being a Democracy (it is probably where your mis-guided sense of entitlement comes from). If it was every member would get a vote, but you don't.

If you don't like how it is run you can stop paying your dues, and go create you own association.

Even if it was, the issue only affects tiny percentage of the members. To imply that this is some issue that is even on the radar of most members is pretty delusional. People do not care about this quixotic quest. They are fine with what USTA has done.

BTW complaining about sandbagging is probably the #1 complaint on the league forum. I guess you believe all that is just absurd...

It is so easy and cheap during the younger years. I don't know why some parents do not understand this.

There is not one single college coach that cares about how good your player was when they were 12. They only care about how good they are when they are after their Junior year of high school. So, that means when they are roughly 17.

Players who are truly competitive on the national level are dominating in their section one level up, if not 2. If your 12 year old is not the #1 or #2 player in the 14s in your section then they are not truly a "National" level player. I am sorry if this sounds cold but it is the truth. There are a few exceptions but for the most part it is very accurate. The reason is because the top 14s are playing 16s and so on.

I never understood going to National events and seeing kids that would lose 0&0, in both the main and back draws. If there is that big of a difference in levels then you should not be taking your player there.

I get asked all the time whether a player is ready to play a certain tournament. It is very simple, do you think they can win 2 rounds in the main? If the answer is no, then they are not ready. There are times when you get stuck playing the #1 seed but that is the nice thing about the USTA system, you are not stuck going home right away. You get the opportunity to fight your way through the back draw.

Stop worrying about playing "National" events and worry more about playing kids that are older than they are. In college, very few Freshman play Freshman, they usually are playing somebody who is older. The sooner they get used to it the better.

I have not heard of one single 12 year old that is the #1 in the B18s in their section. That means that everybody can save money in the lower ages, until that happens.

It makes no sense to argue the pros and cons of the changes without understand the truth about why they were made.

Take a step back and look at the bigger picture. When a company that is a monopoly makes changes the vast majority of its customers do not like and then explains why the changes are good in a way that the majority of participates believe do not make sense you have to question the companies true motivations. Usually, the people making the changes are the ones benefiting from them. It’s not rocket science.

Arguing with people who think it makes sense to take away opportunity because people cannot be trusted to make good decision is a waste of time.

In 2010 junior players did not care about the Player Development program. If you were a good player and had a private coach with a few friends to practice with you did not need them. You could work with your coach, practice with your team or at your club and play lots of tournaments with high quality competition. You did not need to travel very much to qualify for the top tournaments. There were many national tournaments all over the country and they were not difficult to enter. If you could do well in a couple of L3s you were in your L2, do well there and you are in the L1s. You did not need to play them all because there were many to choose from and there were bigger draws. If you wanted to play more tournaments, because you lived in SoCal or had the means, you would have continuous access to top quality competition to gage where you were at and improve through experience. You did not need wild cards when you aged up because the draws were large and you could play your way in.

The PD guys hated this. The best kids did not want to be in the PD program. It is difficult to justify the big budgets and highly paid executives when none of the players even care you exist.

How to fix this problem? How about cut the number of tournaments to the point where it is difficult to have access to great competition increasing the importance of a training center with many players. How about cut the draw sizes and increase the wildcards controlled by the PD guys giving them the power to get kids into the tournament draws and keep them in when the age up. Problem solved. Now Player Development is important and players want (need) to be in the program.

The problem was clear and they had the power to fix it. So they did. I bet the number of applicants to the HiPo program has skyrocketed. The activity level makes the coaches look great. I can just imagine the power points with graphs up and to the right on applications, players in the program and success rates. By the time anyone realizes junior tennis in the US is going down the tubes Pat’s bank account will be full and we can move on to the next guy who has an even better idea for his bank account, oh, that’s right, I meant for US junior tennis.

I disagree with your analysis of Gameboy's points and your assessment of how he attains his happiness.

Click to expand...

Gameboy attains his happiness by listening to his daughter playing piano and watching her doing Singapore math. He attempted to enjoy her playing tennis but it did not pan out. So he smartly concluded that investing time and money in tennis would produce negative ROI and would just distract her from achieving the goal of his life - for her to be accepted into IVY LEAGUE UNIVERSITY.
A lot of the statements made by Gameboy are either ridiculous or serve-serving. Junior tennis player ranked 100-800 are the mainstay of all junior HP tennis programs around the country. They make HP tennis possible as it is their parents who support tennis clubs, coaches, equipment and clothing manufacturers and very often those players ranked below 100 as well as under-served groups Gameboy so worried about. USTA does not provide any resources to these players except overcharging them for poorly run sanctioned tournaments often conducted in questionable locations at inconvenient times and in weird conditions. Most of them are looking forward to become college players. But Gameboy does not care about this kind of players and will be fine if college tennis goes away because it does not serve his needs. Even worse these pesky tennis players may take 10+ Ivy spots reserved for his daughter.
Parents of these poor souls actually want junior tennis to be a positive experience for their kids and they are advocating some reasonable National tournament schedule that would really achieve the goals stated by USTA - cheaper participation, less missed school, ability to compete at the proper level as well as reasonable access to college recruiting showcases. Proposed tournament schedule mostly does not achieve these goals and many parents are obviously upset. But here comes Gameboy and tells us - screw you - you and your kids are not important so shut up. And the best part is that Gameboy has probably never been to a junior tennis tournament.

justinmadison is correct. When Pat Mac makes statements that they can identify the talent that can make it at a young age, it shows the arrogance and ignorance is coming from the top. Even Nick B. admits he has no clue who can truly make it at a young age.

Like or dislike the USTA, it can not be argued effectively that they are not control freaks in some aspects of their operations.

The PD guys hated this. The best kids did not want to be in the PD program. It is difficult to justify the big budgets and highly paid executives when none of the players even care you exist.

How to fix this problem? How about cut the number of tournaments to the point where it is difficult to have access to great competition increasing the importance of a training center with many players. How about cut the draw sizes and increase the wildcards controlled by the PD guys giving them the power to get kids into the tournament draws and keep them in when the age up. Problem solved. Now Player Development is important and players want (need) to be in the program.

Gameboy attains his happiness by listening to his daughter playing piano and watching her doing Singapore math. He attempted to enjoy her playing tennis but it did not pan out. So he smartly concluded that investing time and money in tennis would produce negative ROI and would just distract her from achieving the goal of his life - for her to be accepted into IVY LEAGUE UNIVERSITY.
A lot of the statements made by Gameboy are either ridiculous or serve-serving. Junior tennis player ranked 100-800 are the mainstay of all junior HP tennis programs around the country. They make HP tennis possible as it is their parents who support tennis clubs, coaches, equipment and clothing manufacturers and very often those players ranked below 100 as well as under-served groups Gameboy so worried about. USTA does not provide any resources to these players except overcharging them for poorly run sanctioned tournaments often conducted in questionable locations at inconvenient times and in weird conditions. Most of them are looking forward to become college players. But Gameboy does not care about this kind of players and will be fine if college tennis goes away because it does not serve his needs. Even worse these pesky tennis players may take 10+ Ivy spots reserved for his daughter.
Parents of these poor souls actually want junior tennis to be a positive experience for their kids and they are advocating some reasonable National tournament schedule that would really achieve the goals stated by USTA - cheaper participation, less missed school, ability to compete at the proper level as well as reasonable access to college recruiting showcases. Proposed tournament schedule mostly does not achieve these goals and many parents are obviously upset. But here comes Gameboy and tells us - screw you - you and your kids are not important so shut up. And the best part is that Gameboy has probably never been to a junior tennis tournament.

Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of the points that Gameboy makes. So wuddya gonna do now........post an imagined profile of my family and their tennis abilities and aspirations?

If you think the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If you think the law is on your side, argue the law. If you think neither the facts nor the law is on your side, attack the person..........I guess is the mantra around here.

Would be interested in knowing how anyone thinks the USTA should alter its schedule to provide more reasonable access to college recruiting showcases, as you brought up. I think college showcases are very valuable, but I didn't realize the USTA is/was adversely affecting my family's access to them.

What should I be mad at the USTA about in connection with college showcases?

I find the debate interesting. I also agree with a gameboy on a good deal if it. But I also have some students who fall into the group he says we should not 'care about'. The parents are as passionately angry about things as I have ever seen them.

I find the debate interesting. I also agree with a gameboy on a good deal if it. But I also have some students who fall into the group he says we should not 'care about'. The parents are as passionately angry about things as I have ever seen them.

So I'm very torn about the changes.

Click to expand...

I didn't give too much literal meaning to "care about". The point I took away was that in a policy decision that will positively affect some and negatively affect others, the interest served in satisfying certain constituencies is not always decisive in coming to a final result.

What is the general profile of your students who are not in one of the winning constituencies? I am sure you are not just lying down and taking it..........how are you working around it?

I disagree with your analysis of Gameboy's points and your assessment of how he attains his happiness.

He has not stated or suggested that anyone is immature or irresponsible. You are the only one who has done that.

I don't think anyone in this thread is immature or irresponsible.

But if you think the shoe fits.............

Click to expand...

Ha! I see what you did there, very clever...

When he says parents of junior tennis players are like horses who cannot resist carrots, he is characterizing them as not being capable of making responsible decisions, hence irresponsible. So don't tell me he didn't do that..

Gameboy is more than capable of defending himself. But I don't even think Gameboy would disagree with the sentiment that he thinks taking a child ranked 200 to a national tournament is a financially irresponsible decision..